NationStates Jolt Archive

BdC-15 "Éléphant" HBT

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b76/VanLuxemburg/BdC-15VFOR-22.png

Type: Heavy Battle Tank
Manufacturer: Müller Panzerwerke B.V.
Crew (5): Commander, Gunner, 25mm-Gunner, Technician, Driver

Weight 90 Tons
Power plant: VLT Automotive VV24 Multi-fuel/ Bio Diesel 2400 HP
Air-Assisted Transmission 6 Speed Forward
2 Speed Reverse

Speed - Maximum 79 km/h (Governed)
Speed - Cross Country 56 km/h
Speed - 10% Slope 37 km/h
Speed - 60% Slope 20 km/h
Acceleration
(0 to 79 km/h) 15 Seconds
Cruising Range 576km

Main Armament: 150mm Müller Panzerwerke B.V. Smoothbore with Auto-Loader
Secondary Armament: 25mm VDZ & VL Auto-Cannon + 7.62 Minimi MG Co-Axial
Commander's Weapon: 7.62 Minimi MG + HOT 3 AT/Starstreak AA missile.
Coaxial Weapon .50 M2 Machinegun
Technician's weapon: 7.62 Minimi MG

NBC System: NBC-2000 with Airconditioning - San Gimignano Aero N.V.

Unit Replacement Cost: $13 Million USD.


The BdC-15 is Van Luxemburg's answer to the need for a heavy Tank/ Tank destroyer. It has been in development since 1998, and the project was started by Müller Panzerwerke B.V., which has it's factories near Innsbruck. The heavy vehicle was expected to reach full production by 2003, but this was postponed to 2004.
Nowadays, over 10,000 vehicles have been built, to supply several divisions of the Van Luxemburgian Army. (To be exact, 11 divisions)

Propulsion

The BdC-15 is supplied with VLT Automotive's masterpiece, the VV24 engine. This engine, which are in fact two V-12 engines joined together, delivers 2400 HP, while running on several possible fuels, of which Bio-Diesel is encouraged to use. it also uses a VLT Air-assisted Transmission, built to assist the driver to make higer speeds. 6 forwards gears and 2 reverse gears are built-in. the engine of the BdC-15 is located in the back, surrounded by sound-isolating materials and a layer of titanium armouring.

Armour

the armour of the BdC-15 consists of a layer of Chobham Armour, and a layer of Cermet Armour. This combination, reinforced with depleted Uranium rods, makes it almost 623mm (400mm Chobham, 223mm Cermet) thick, making a total RHAe value of about 1440mm. This can be reinforced with an Enhanced Appliqué Armour kit of 100mm thick, upping the RHAe level to an absolute maximum of 2440 mm.


Main Armament

The main armament of the "Éléphant" was supplied by Müller Panzerwerke, and consists of a 150mm Smoothbore gun, supplied with an autoloader. This gun can fire both APFSDS and HEAT. As it has been supplied with an Autoloader, one crewmember could be removed from the list. the autoloader has been covered with Titanium protection, with service hatches, to forecome accidents like those happened in the T-72. The main storage for APFSDS and HEAT rounds is located just above the engine, also using it's own armoured case, to prevent explosion during a strike. The main gun uses a digital stabilizing system, to make sure rounds are fired straight at the target indicated.
The gunner also has the Fire Management system FM13B, allowing to track targets, set the max number of shots in a minute, fire the gun, automatically aim the gun, and switch between rounds and the Co-axial MG.

Secondary Armament

The BdC-15 is also called "The Basher" by it's crews. This is because of a wide range of secondary armaments and the powerfull main gun. The BdC-15 has a 25mm Autocannon mounted on the top, with a Co-Axial 7.62 MG, and the commander's post on top. On top of that, the commander is supplied with an 7.62mm FN Minimi MG, aswell as an HOT 3 AT or Starstreak AA missile launcher. More in front is the weapon of the MG-Gunner/Technician. This is a 7.62mm FN Minimi aswell. Every crewmember in the Van Luxemburgian Army is also supplied with the MP-7 PDW, aswell as a SIG P226 pistol.

Crew

The crew is quite large, for an HBT only one meter longer than an Leopard 2A6. This was mainly done to supply the BdC-15 with as many weapons as possible. The commander and the 25mm gunner share the highest turret, while the technician and the gunner share the
front of the turret. The driver is alone, located in the front of the hull.

Systems

The BdC-15 is equipped with as many systems as there were available as of 2003.
Here is a small selection:

Anno-2 EOCMDAS

Anno-2 consists of a specialized computer/control panel, two electro-optical interference emitters located on each side of the gun, four laser sensors located on top of the turret, and racks of dedicated anti-laser smoke grenades.
The Anno-2 has two combat roles. In the first role, it works against IR guided ATGMs, by aligning the turret front to the incoming ATGM and using IR emitters to send false signals which scramble the ATGM guidance system. The principle involved is the following.
Wire-guided missiles such as the American TOW are guided to the target by means of a wire and a flare on the back of the missile. The flare is used to keep a 'reference point' of the missile in relationship to the target lock held by the operator, and the guidance computer tries to put the flare on the reference point. Anno-2 emitters create a large hotspot, essentially tricking the missile guidance into following the Anno-2 hotspot instead of the flare hotspot, resulting in faulty course corrections by the ATGW computer. In fact, the computer shall usually believe that no horisontal course correction is necessary since the false flare comes from the same direction as the targeted tank, while vertical corrections shall cause ATGM to either dive into the ground or climb into the sky, depending on whether the operator holds the lock below or above the emitters.
The second part of the system defeats laser guided weapons. When a laser beam is detected the Anno-2 informs the crew with light and sound; it then launches laser defeating smoke grenades, which enshroud the tank and break or degrade the lock. The tank commander can also press a button that will turn the turret front to the laser to meet incoming ATGM with the best protected section and to engage the laser beam source with the maingun. This system is roughly a modernised version of the Russian Shtora-1 system.

FM-3

The FM-3 systems is used to make the gun more independent from the gunner. The FM-3 system takes over the role of target-finding, Aiming, and firing. It is equipped with advanced IR sensors, aswell as Day/night vision, thermal night sights, Rangefinders and a fully automated computing system.

CHS Cees-1

The Commander-Help-System is used to assist the commander by giving orders. It has stored many known strategies and Anti-Tank systems, aswell as most known vehicles, such as the Abrams or the Leopard, but also the ST-37K1, for example. It also scans the horizon and make spossible threat assesments. E.g.: If a T-55 tank comes from the East, and an Abrams from the West, the CHS will advise the commander to open fire on the Abrams first. It will also advise how to engage that Abrams, and which gun/round to use. This is all based on Day/Night vision, thermal sights, rangefinders and IR systems, aswell as a military internet, to connect to HQ, or other tanks.

Price: $13 million USD/ 7.35 Million Van Luxemburgian Euros

ATTENTION!
The price of the BdC-15 is high, but the vehicle is worth the money. Because of the highly advanced systems and dangerous weapons included in the package, Müller Panzerwerke B.V., in cooperation with the Van Luxemburgian Ministry of Defence, has decided to limit this weapon to trusted allies, with production rights only available to highly-trusted Allies.

Comments


It's Frankenpanzer!

(Your comment can be here aswell! just make your comment and you'll have a chance it'll get quoted!)

(OOC: My HBT project. Thanks to The Macabees for his excellent write-up on how to design a tank on the RPU, I used it all the time as a reference. I’m almost sure that I can use a 150mm smoothbore. Please don’t come up with any comments that I should use ETC cannons. I consider ETC cannons PMT, after some discussions with allies of mine, some month before this project. (Does Listeneisse ring a bell?). So I ain’t using them. I’m more concerned of the weight however. I think it’s maybe a bit too light. Can I get verification on that? Also, I would like to thank Wingarde, for helping me out with the colour of the tracks on the pic.)

No-one has any comments? *Bump* for the night!

Looks like a great tank, plenty of armor. The main gun looks like it could take out an M-1A2 with out a problem. The secondary weapons gives you lots of choices you can kill aircraft, light vehicles to infantry.
I only see two problems. first it is too big and too heavy to be airmoble this most likely is not a problem for your military but for mine it is a bit much.
Logistically this tank could be a headache, not so much for the fuel but keeping all the different weapon systems in ammo could be a problem over a long campaign.
One question at 90 tons what does this tank use for a wrecker to get it out of trouble.

Looks like a great tank, plenty of armor. The main gun looks like it could take out an M-1A2 with out a problem. The secondary weapons gives you lots of choices you can kill aircraft, light vehicles to infantry.
I only see two problems. first it is too big and too heavy to be airmoble this most likely is not a problem for your military but for mine it is a bit much.
Logistically this tank could be a headache, not so much for the fuel but keeping all the different weapon systems in ammo could be a problem over a long campaign.
One question at 90 tons what does this tank use for a wrecker to get it out of trouble.

Not only that, but any attempt to use this tank in combat had better have powerful and mobile support units. Without them your field commanders would have a powerful spear head, but no shaft.

But overall a very good tank. Because of its size and manuverability I would, if I were fighting it, use small teams of soldiers using guerilla tactics and armed with anti-armor rockets. Flank the big whales, take out the tracks, then have the crew talk with my grenades...

Anyway. Nice tank.

Why use a conventional gun if you can use an ETC gun of a smaller caliber and get the same effect?

Why use a conventional gun if you can use an ETC gun of a smaller caliber and get the same effect?
OOC: Because he, along with many others I presume, considers them to be PMT.

Overall I think your tank is rather good (from the aspect as a well written design for NS, rather then how effective it would be [in NS or RL, I can’t say if this tank would be]. I like the decision to not go for an ECT gun a lot. I did notice some things:
This is meant as a complement but more as food for thought or you might like to know.

The gun at 150mm is big, but that does not really matter as had not the 152mm gun worked it would have been a great weapon on tanks no larger then an M60 [main battle tank not rifle; this could include many M48's]. The issue of ammo handling is solved by the autoloader. The 25mm cannon would mean that shots that normally would be needed from the main gun can instead be made with the 25mm cannon.
I would have gone with 140mm and 40mm in real life (in NS i would make up my own gun sizes) if I had to make a tank design; you might want to consider a larger secondary gun to allow it to do more support work the French have a good 40mm cannon that the British are using (some have been made, 2006 is the official date last I read) that fit just fine in the space needed for most 25mm cannons, also some may like the idea of a Gun-Mortar.

The large crew is a good think, from what I hear more eyes is always a good thing for a tank. This in tern with high automation should give your tank good situational awareness.

The armor: Titanium and laminates with depleted uranium; Seems high but all armor seems high on NS. What would it weigh? I don’t know as tank armor is not the same over the entirety vehicle, and most RL armor is classified. 90 metric tons is high but...

Size: It would make a big target. The layout does it damage in the respect. It would be much taller then many other tanks. To reduce height the driver could be put in the main turret [like in a MBT-70; this would increase cost, complexity, performance, and could offer a more efficient shape to armor].


I think there are some errors that you may wish to fix. I just am pointing them out for your help and not to criticizing you.
"fire both APFSDS as HEAT."

"MG-Gunner's weapon: 7.62 Minimi MG"
You should specify that the MG-Gunner is the technician in this short upper part. In the full write-up below you do say but I think the clarification could help

There was another typo was
"the autoloader has been covered in a Titanium protection"
I think that it would be better as
'the autoloader has been covered with Titanium protection'
but do as you wish (as with I say)

edit.
And I wish to say again that the lack of ECT is a good decision.

Also I forgot to say: If you need an armored recovery vehicle what most often happens for big tanks (in RL) is that the use the tank as the basis for the armored recovery vehicle.

And I wish to say again that the lack of ECT is a good decision.

What exactly does the acronym ECT stand for? I'm not well versed in that much modern tech. Uranium Depleted Slugs is about the depth of knowledge that I know when it comes to ballistic weapons/armor.

What exactly does the acronym ECT stand for?

IIRC, ETC is 'Electro-Thermal-Chemical.' It's a gun that uses plasma to ignite conventional propellant to burn it more efficiently than a regular ignition system would, resulting in a higher muzzle velocity for the same weight of propellant.

And it is PERFECTLY modern tech... after all, Rheinmetal has built a prototype of a 120mm ETC gun. If you dont consider THAT Modern Tech, then I guess you dont consider Tungsten Rod Sattelites as Modern Tech either.

"If possible, we would like to purchase production rights. Is this acceptable? If so, please name your price."

--Minister of War Lester Lindsey--

Slight correction GMCMA; the propellant is not a conventional propellant, it's a chemical propellant. In the end, I guess they can be considered one in the same, since a conventional propellant is a gas, but I think chemical propellants are meant to be more complex and more turbulent than their predecessors. I think plastic propellants also fall under the category of a conventional propellant.

Slight correction GMCMA; the propellant is not a conventional propellant, it's a chemical propellant. In the end, I guess they can be considered one in the same, since a conventional propellant is a gas, but I think chemical propellants are meant to be more complex and more turbulent than their predecessors.

IIRC, it's just a regular propellant charge that's combusted more thoroughly. The plasma ignition allows some new propellant types to be used that couldn't normally because they're too stable to ignite with a regular ignition system [which is good, because it means they're less likely to explode due to damage], but there's no difference between a 'conventional' propellant and anything an ETC would use in terms of operational principles, other than ignition.

And it is PERFECTLY modern tech... after all, Rheinmetal has built a prototype of a 120mm ETC gun. If you dont consider THAT Modern Tech, then I guess you dont consider Tungsten Rod Sattelites as Modern Tech either.

Modern tech runs up to 2006. The ETC will not see full effeciency until 2017; source: Rhinemetal. [full effeciency is 100% effeciency over the 120mm smoothbore.]

The FM-3 systems is used to make the gun more independent from the gunner. The FM-3 system takes over the role of target-finding, Aiming, and firing.

What exactly does the gunner do, then? Cheer to the FM-3 when it fires?

Tarlag:
It wasn't my intention to make this baby airmobile. it can however be deployed on LPD's and such.

Also, it isn't as a logistical nightmare as you might think. All these sorts of ammo are already used in my army, so that wouldn't be a problem.

What kind of wrecker? probably one of my more powerful 1000HP Tank transporters/towtrucks/wreckers. Or, it's own counterpart with a crane on.

Pushka:
Relative Liberty is right, but I assume you haven't read my OOC notes?
I quote:
Please don’t come up with any comments that I should use ETC cannons. I consider ETC cannons PMT, after some discussions with allies of mine, some month before this project. (Does Listeneisse ring a bell?). So I ain’t using them.

Potty 5:
Thanks alot. I won't have a higher caliber Auto-cannon on it, as the same caliber is used on my VBCI IFV's (You know, the new French-built IFV).

About the Armour: I frankly shoudn't kno how much it weighs. I gave an indication of which I'm not sure however.

Size: I know, but that's the price you pay. Also with the high number of crewmembers, I shouldn't place the driver in the turret. it would make it a bit small there, and that reduces the crew it's comfort, which affects it's morale.

Errors: yeah, sorry about that. After all, I'm just a simple 14 year-old Dutchman.... :p

Roach-Busters: (IC)
"No. I assume you haven't read the disclaimer? We don't count you under our Most Highly Trusted Allies. we barely even had any contact lately."

Minister of Defence Phillipe Dermont, van Luxemburg
Owner of Müller Panzerwerke B.V., Bastian Müller.

(OOC)
Madnestan:

He controls the system. Many older gunners however prefer to fire the gun themselves, and use the system as a reference.

B U M P!

OOC: I'd be interested in this vehicle but you could hardly call VL and PSR 'close allies.' That and I have no real use for a HBT. But, very nicely designed, all the same.

(OOC: I have always tried to make my stuff a bit limited available to the international market. This is because I didn't want that half RP'ing NS starts using the same vehicle. Although I will never hit that point, I simply ain't interested in people who just simply say "500 million tanks, please". I might be a bit "non-profit", but this isn't the way how it works in RL too, is it? Anyways, if you would be really interested, I can sell you a few, just TG me.)

OOC: A very valid point, VL. Your design is well thought out, and if I hadn't already designed my armoured units to take advantage of other equipment, some "Schwere Panzer" battalions could be useful. The primary advantage I see in this vehicle is the wide variety of secondary weapons, and the absolutely massive armour numbers. I will keep this thread bookmarked, and if the combat experiance my troops are about to gain in a neighbouring nation* swings into step with the potential of a few Heavy Tank Battalions / Brigades, then yes, I will take a look at fielding your design or a similiar vehicle. Just keeping the channel open at this point, methinks.

The odds of VL and the PSR finding themselves on opposite sides of the Folksvang (Battlefield) against one another are very, very low.
* I am currently considering sending troops to support a number of Republican troops to prevent an allied nation to falling to Fascist opposers and foreign aggressors in a civil war that's rapidly becoming international. Granted, the terrain isn't that good for tanks, but considering the equipment that a nation I will likely end up fighting fields, I may need to get my hands on a vehicle that can take one Hell of a punch to the nose and then cave their heads in with the return blow. In short, your vehicle here, or one damned like it.

(OOC: Perfect with me. My TG channel is always open, 24/7.)

IIRC, ETC is 'Electro-Thermal-Chemical.' It's a gun that uses plasma to ignite conventional propellant to burn it more efficiently than a regular ignition system would, resulting in a higher muzzle velocity for the same weight of propellant.

TY GMC, it gives me more ideas for my own weapons...